Commnr. of Customs, Mumbai Versus M/s. A.S. Moloobhoy & Sons & Ors.

2015 (5) TMI 803 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Duty demand - Invocation of extended period of limitation - Held that:- The limitation, at the relevant time, for issuance of show cause notice was six months. It is therefore clear that in terms of Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, the show cause notice issued to the respondents before the limitation period. However, the Department sought to invoke the aforesaid proviso on the ground that there was willful misstatement and miss-declaration of the imports in the Bills of Entries which were fi .....

imported goods were to be utilized was stated in the communication. After going through the same it was for the authorities to come to the conclusion whether goods could be treated for the purpose of ship repair or not. In no case it can be termed as willful misstatement/wrong declaration. On this ground alone the respondent is to succeed in these cases. - Decided against Revenue. - CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9691-9693 OF 2003, CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3115-3117 OF 2015 - Dated:- 26-3-2015 - A.K.SIKRI AND ROHIN .....

l reveals that it has decided the case in favour of the respondents/importers on merits and also on the ground that show cause notice issued by the Department claiming import duty was beyond the period of limitation and it was not a case where extended period of limitation could be availed by the Department under the proviso to Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962. After hearing the matter at length we are of the opinion that since the view of the Tribunal on limitation is correct, it is not even .....

issued to the respondents before the limitation period. However, the Department sought to invoke the aforesaid proviso on the ground that there was willful misstatement and miss-declaration of the imports in the Bills of Entries which were filed by the respondents in clearing the goods. The misstatement/miss-declaration which is attributed is that though the imports were not meant for repairs, it was so stated in the Bills of Entries. This stand to invoke the proviso found to be incorrect by the .....

on in manufacturing of new other vehicle as required before the extended period can be invoke the irrelevant. The proviso relating to the extended period under Section 21 of the Customs Act is similarly worded as the proviso under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act. In the absence of anything to show that the importers, knew or had reason to believe that the activity would not amount to ship repair it is not possible to conclude that they willfully misdeclared the goods as for repair. We d .....